Hans Asperger, National Socialism, and "race hygiene" in Nazi-era Vienna
Hans Asperger, National Socialism, and "race hygiene" in Nazi-era Vienna
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13229-018-0208-6
复制
发表时间：
2018-04-19
期刊：
影响因子：
6.2
通讯作者：
Czech, Herwig
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Czech, Herwig
背景资料：1938年，汉斯·伯格（1906-1980）首次将一组具有独特心理特征的儿童称为“自闭症精神病患者”，比1943年利奥·坎纳关于自闭症的著名论文早了几年。1944年，他发表了一份关于这一主题的综合研究报告（1942年作为博士后论文提交给维也纳大学），直到20世纪80年代才得到国际承认。从那时起，“布雷格综合征”这个名字越来越流行，以表彰他对这种疾病概念化的杰出贡献。当时，艾伯格在纳粹维也纳度过了他职业生涯的关键岁月，这一事实引起了一些关于他与国家社会主义及其种族卫生政策的潜在联系的争议。然而，文件证据很少，随着时间的推移，将伯格描述为国家社会主义的积极反对者。本文的主要目标是重新评估这种叙述，这是基于在很大程度上由Bogger自己和他发表的工作的一小部分所作的陈述。方法：利用大量当代出版物和以前未探索的档案文件（包括伯格的个人档案和他对病人的临床评估），这篇论文提供了一个关键的检查伯格的生活，政治，和职业生涯之前和期间纳粹时期在奥地利。结果：布雷格设法适应自己的纳粹政权，并得到奖励，他肯定的忠诚与职业机会。他加入了NSDAP的几个附属组织（虽然不是纳粹党本身），公开合法化种族卫生政策，包括强制绝育，并在几个场合，积极配合儿童“安乐死”计划。他诊断病人时使用的语言往往非常严厉（甚至与维也纳臭名昭著的施皮格尔格伦德“安乐死”机构的工作人员所写的评估相比），掩盖了他试图通过美化他们的诊断来保护在他照顾下的儿童的想法。作为国家社会主义的原则性反对者，以及他的病人反对纳粹“安乐死”和其他种族卫生的勇敢捍卫者，这些措施在历史证据面前站不住脚。这位自闭症研究的先驱所扮演的角色更成问题。今后使用这个名字时，应反映其起源于纳粹时代维也纳的令人不安的背景。
Background: Hans Asperger (1906-1980) first designated a group of children with distinct psychological characteristics as 'autistic psychopaths' in 1938, several years before Leo Kanner's famous 1943 paper on autism. In 1944, Asperger published a comprehensive study on the topic (submitted to Vienna University in 1942 as his postdoctoral thesis), which would only find international acknowledgement in the 1980s. From then on, the eponym 'Asperger's syndrome' increasingly gained currency in recognition of his outstanding contribution to the conceptualization of the condition. At the time, the fact that Asperger had spent pivotal years of his career in Nazi Vienna caused some controversy regarding his potential ties to National Socialism and its race hygiene policies. Documentary evidence was scarce, however, and over time a narrative of Asperger as an active opponent of National Socialism took hold. The main goal of this paper is to re-evaluate this narrative, which is based to a large extent on statements made by Asperger himself and on a small segment of his published work.Methods: Drawing on a vast array of contemporary publications and previously unexplored archival documents (including Asperger's personnel files and the clinical assessments he wrote on his patients), this paper offers a critical examination of Asperger's life, politics, and career before and during the Nazi period in Austria.Results: Asperger managed to accommodate himself to the Nazi regime and was rewarded for his affirmations of loyalty with career opportunities. He joined several organizations affiliated with the NSDAP (although not the Nazi party itself), publicly legitimized race hygiene policies including forced sterilizations and, on several occasions, actively cooperated with the child 'euthanasia' program. The language he employed to diagnose his patients was often remarkably harsh (even in comparison with assessments written by the staff at Vienna's notorious Spiegelgrund 'euthanasia' institution), belying the notion that he tried to protect the children under his care by embellishing their diagnoses.Conclusion: The narrative of Asperger as a principled opponent of National Socialism and a courageous defender of his patients against Nazi 'euthanasia' and other race hygiene measures does not hold up in the face of the historical evidence. What emerges is a much more problematic role played by this pioneer of autism research. Future use of the eponym should reflect the troubling context of its origins in Nazi-era Vienna.